Golovkin made all his supporters fools yet we still have some defending him.

[aboutfkntime]

Wtf are you talking about? Where have I even discussed weight cutting here? The dude brought that ish up out of the blue refering to an old thread that I only participated in sporadically (if we're even thinking of the same one) and if I know him at all he will have wilfully misunderstood anything I said anyway. Dude doesn't even refer to any comments I made anyway, just to a '309 page thread' in which he asserts he made fools of everyone but I expect just did his SOP of just pouring scorn anyone who disagreed with his inflammatory comments without proving anything except perhaps in his own head. Find some relevent comments that I've actually made on the issue and we'll discuss 'em if you like.

FWIW I'm substantially in agreement up to a point, less skilled fighters can gain an advantage over guys of a similar skill level by draining to come in much bigger in the ring, however in long run the extra bulk can't make up for significant deficiencies in skill or will. Furthermore not only is it likely to reduce longevity in the long term, the simple fact is that body becomes less able to tolerate the stresses resulting from severe dehyration and rehydration with age, so it's a strategy which can typically only be sustained effectively in younger fighters, giving diminishing returns into the late 20s and probably becoming as much a liability as anything once they reach 30 or so (which is one of the reasons you see so many fighters move up to their final weighclass around the age of 30 or so, then stay there for the remainder of their career - it ain't that they're actually coming to the ring bigger, just that they're able to drain less). Course, there are individual exceptions a plenty, but it's a decent rule of thumb.

you were there, happily blurting out the same dumb casual-fan garbage as the other muppets

and that was no exception... whenever a hypejob needs a pom-pom waving fairy.,.. there you are, with bells on... blurting out dumb excuses to justify mediocrity

the thread-starter was right... Golovkin made you fanboys look like fools... you guys took sooooo many L's... and yet, you will still happily defend him

hopeless fanboy, who cannot keep it real... keep officially distancing yourself from the casuals, but keep unofficially fronting up whenever they need your enthusiastic support...

[Citizen Koba]

you were there, happily blurting out the same dumb casual-fan garbage as the other muppets

and that was no exception... whenever a hypejob needs a pom-pom waving fairy.,.. there you are, with bells on... blurting out dumb excuses to justify mediocrity

the thread-starter was right... Golovkin made you fanboys look like fools... you guys took sooooo many L's... and yet, you will still happily defend him

hopeless fanboy, who cannot keep it real... keep officially distancing yourself from the casuals, but keep unofficially fronting up whenever they need your enthusiastic support...

Awww. Did I rattle your cage lil guy?

[Dagomba]

I think the most ridiculous shit from GGG was that mexican style bullshit.
Even more retarded were the idiots spewing the "mexicans for Golovkin" mantra. Bunch of dumb mfs.

[Boxing_1013]

and yet, here you are LMAO

btw shlthead, I am not the guy who sports an unsubstantiated lie in his sig... YOU ARE

and I have pointed that out many times

you lying piece-of-shlt... you only put me on ignore immediately after you create a thread, because you don't want me to decimate it by pointing out your ******ity

clownboy, the profession judge that you keep quoting... was an official judge for the Canelo/Golovkin rematch...




... which makes you a special kind of dumb

for all of your ******ity, I quote you directly... and yes, I can provide links... unlike you

#linkless
#justanothercluelessfanboyliar

The funniest thing about you...is that you really don't understand the distinction being made in the two Weisfeld situations you cite...you bring it up to me like it's some 'gotcha' moment lol.

And then you even parade that ******ity for all the world to see, in your sig lol.

But keep it up man...I enjoy laughing at you about it lol

[aboutfkntime]

The funniest thing about you...is that you really don't understand the distinction being made in the two Weisfeld situations you cite...you bring it up to me like it's some 'gotcha' moment lol.

And then you even parade that ******ity for all the world to see, in your sig lol.

But keep it up man...I enjoy laughing at you about it lol

there is NO distinction... you 12yo fap-monkey...


FACT: you simply CANNOT twist the words of Steve Weisfeld to somehow insinuate that Golovkin beat Canelo in the rematch...

because...

WEISFELD WAS AN OFFICIAL JUDGE FOR THAT FIGHT...

... AND HE SCORED THAT FIGHT FOR CANELO !!







looooooooool

fookin hilarious

[aboutfkntime]

Golovkin made all his supporters fools...

the cream rises to the top... the sludge sinks to the bottom

[DreamFighter]

You failed to address my two main points. Firstly, there never has been any criticism over how a fighter won a belt when considering that fighter losing said belt in the ring.

theres no actual point here.

Secondly, you fail to address, and even go so far as to parse it out of your quote, the simple fact that Mr. Cotto fought Daniel Geale when Mr. Geale did not satisfy your demand.

Please address those.

theres nothing to address, you just want there to be - observe -

i am saying GGG didnt win a title from Geale

you are saying whats the excuse for Cotto also facing Geale. Cotto HAD won a title, and they were fighting for that, so there is no parallel for GGG being given one outside the ring.

they are different arguments.
thats why I "failed" to address your fail.

[GGG Gloveking]

theres no actual point here.



theres nothing to address, you just want there to be - observe -

i am saying GGG didnt win a title from Geale

you are saying whats the excuse for Cotto also facing Geale. Cotto HAD won a title, and they were fighting for that, so there is no parallel for GGG being given one outside the ring.

they are different arguments.
thats why I "failed" to address your fail.

Do you remember saying this?

maybe but cotto would be nearly 40 by the time GGG won a title in the ring, so he'd have to get in the queue with everyone offering a title, and he'd be several places down the queue.

Now explain it...

[DreamFighter]

Do you remember saying this?


Now explain it...

its entirely unrelated to what you wrote.

done.

You mentioning that Cotto took a weak defence before Canelo means nothing more than he felt like a weak defence before facing a true multiweight champions Canelo.

[GGG Gloveking]

its entirely unrelated to what you wrote.

done.

No it's not. It's the condition you put on somebody fighting Cotto. You sat there and lied, saying a non champion has to get in queue, when in fact, the non champion got in the ring with Cotto.

Then your next excuse, which I've never, ever seen before, is that GGG didn't win a belt in the ring. Of course, that really doesn't matter since Geale didn't win a damn belt anywhere..

What's your next excuse?